MGM's "phases" to internet gambling....article from 2001......

[hollaballa]

This is an interesting interview from back in the early 2000's.

MGM CEO Terry Lanni mentions 3 phases for MGM's approach to internet gambling.

Phase three is basically "internet gambling being banned and then the country realizing all the tax dollars missed, etc, etc."

He says that america will eventually wake up.....

"When that happens I don't know, but I'm convinced it will happen, and that's only if the Kyl Bill becomes law here in the United States."


Read the interview for more details.

I just think it's interesting how he pretty much layed things out how they needed to happen, and although he's a big proponent of internet gambling, his vision of how things would go were for it to be banned first. Not for lobbying, a study, then legalize.

He basically says the only way the US will wake up is if they try to ban it first.

Interesting. Makes you go, hmmmm, for sure.

http://www.casinogaming.com/features...les/lanni.html

[oldbookguy]

Without even reading the story, I am familiar with the premise and I have stated before that somehow I feel like I am being slow played by someone holding the NUTS.
Ban then we beg for regulation giving congress everything it wants without a fight. Take my chips, PLEASE!

obg

[hollaballa]

things going just as planned for some people [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Skallagrim]

Although its NOT the only factor in modern US politics, there is more than enough back-room money in D.C. for this to definitely be part of a plan.

And its the main reason I like the Wexler "skill-games" bill most of all: it leaves all the poker sites currently out there who stood by us US players in place, and makes all the conspirators and scaredy-cats play catch up.

Skallagrim

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]

Without even reading the story, I am familiar with the premise and I have stated before that somehow I feel like I am being slow played by someone holding the NUTS.
Ban then we beg for regulation giving congress everything it wants without a fight. Take my chips, PLEASE!

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. I guess two things that come to mind are that Congress could have regulated this whenever they wanted, and the main "ban" proponents don't seem to want Internet gambling in any form.

It may work for the domestic B&M casinos after all, but they may be in a tougher situation now than they were before. After all, groups like FoF are only getting louder.

[Grasshopp3r]

Lanni was on the study commission in 1997. They produced a report.

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc...s/fullrpt.html

Internet gambling is discussed in section 2-14 through 16. They also cite a Clinton statement where he calls the internet a free trade zone. That would support the WTO arguments, though.

[oldbookguy]

I agree the Wexler bill is the cure and the simplest at that.

What I have a sneaking suspicion may happen is congress will take a wait and see attitude.
Wait and see how far the WTO goes along with the negotiations by the USTR with all parties.

This way, they will have cover. They will be able to sanction and regulate Internet wagering while stepping forward and saying how GREAT this is since it will be the BEST way to protect families (FoF) while raking in billions as well while still saying we do not condone this, however.

One thing I learned about politicians long ago, NEVER, NEVER underestimate them. They are conniving and as crooked as dog’s hind legs.

obg

[Grasshopp3r]

Lanni has a background in racing.

http://www.ntra.com/stats_bios.aspx?id=2175

He is also making some major coin at MGM.

http://www.forbes.com/static/execpay2005...datatype=Person

[oldbookguy]

More importantly, he was a member of the National Gambling Impact Study Commission who made the report to congress in 1999 so often cited and out of date by FoF, Kyl and others.

obg

[MiltonFriedman]

Next thing I'll hear is that Terri Lanni purposefully flushed $5 million or so down the drain in written off losses on Wagerworks' site, just so it would look good.

(By the way, you might want to look at what company IGT bought into last year before the ban, if you want to bolster your theory. However, you would still be barking up the wrong tree, historically.)

Jesus, get your head straight. Gut-the-US market was NOT a preferred M.O. for MGM.

That having been said, it is clear that the "study"/tax/regulate approach IS favored by entrenched US gaming interests. That does not mean they backed the UIGE Act.